List Workspaces

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that hand-created directories appear with only the slug and marker-created workspaces include metadata. However, it does not describe the actual metadata contents, sorting, or potential side effects, though as a read-style list the core behavior is adequately conveyed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded, with the primary action in the first sentence. The following sentences add genuinely useful distinctions about directory discovery and display without waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given a simple one-parameter schema, an output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers the important operational details: what is listed, how hand-created directories are treated, and when to use the tool. No critical information needed to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already documents the single optional lang parameter with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but none is needed because the schema fully explains the parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: lists workspace/<slug>/ subdirectories with metadata. It also distinguishes the tool from new_workspace by explaining it discovers both marker-created and hand-created directories, leaving no ambiguity about its scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides a clear use case: "at-a-glance what's inside this project" view. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the usage intent is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.